United States v. McGrew, No. 16-1095 (8th Cir. 2017)
Annotate this CaseAfter defendant pleaded guilty to unlawful possession of a firearm, he was sentenced to the statutory maximum penalty of 120 months in prison. On appeal, defendant challenged his sentence and argued that the district court improperly calculated his Sentencing Guidelines range. The court concluded, however, that it need not address the merits of defendant's contentions because even if the district court erred in its Guidelines calculation, its sentence is affirmable. In this case, the district court founded its sentence upon its determination that the statutory maximum is the appropriate sentence and that no sentence within any argued Guidelines range would suffice in this circumstance. Because any error was harmless, the court affirmed the judgment.
Court Description: Smith, Author, with Riley, Chief Judge, and Murphy, Circuit Judge] Criminal case - Sentencing Guidelines. As the district court founded its sentence upon its determination that the statutory maximum was the appropriate sentence and that no sentence within any argued Guidelines range would suffice, any error it may have made in calculating defendant's Guidelines range was harmless; when a sentencing court adequately justifies setting a defendant's sentence based on the maximum statutory penalty, quibbles about the application of Guidelines enhancements or departures become moot. [ January 13, 2017
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.